Journal of Building Engineering 41 (2021) 102433

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Building Engineering

Wool and coir fiber reinforced gypsum ceiling tiles with enhanced stability
and acoustic and thermal resistance
Vijaykumar Guna a, Chandan Yadav a, B.R. Maithri a, Manikandan Ilangovan b,
Francois Touchaleaume c, Benjamin Saulnier d, Yves Grohens d, Narendra Reddy a, *
a Centre for Incubation, Innovation, Research and Consultancy, Jyothy Institute of Technology, Thataguni Post, Bengaluru, 560082, India
b Department of Biomaterial Sciences, Graduate School of Agricultural and Life Sciences, The University of Tokyo, 1-1-1 Yayoi, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo, 113-8657, Japan
c JRU IATE 1208–University Montpellier, INRAE, Montpellier SupAgro - 2 Place Pierre Viala, F-34060, Montpellier 01, France
d Compositic, University South Brittany, 27 Rue Armand Guillemot BP 92116, 56321, Lorient Cedex, France

ARTICLE INFO ABSTRACT

Keywords: An attempt has been made to enhance the properties and applications of gypsum ceiling tiles by utilizing the ex-
Gypsum tiles cellent thermal insulation and flame resistance properties of wool and the durability and strength of coir. Gyp-
Wool sum based ceiling tiles are ubiquitously used for false ceiling applications but have several limitations. Different
Coir fibers
types of additives, finishes and chemicals have been used to overcome the lack of structural integrity under large
Strength
impacts, poor resistance to moisture and limited acoustic resistance of gypsum ceiling tiles. Few studies have
Modulus
Thermal conductivity shown that reinforcing gypsum with natural materials provides better performance properties. Wool and coir are
Insulation biodegradable natural fibers that are available in large quantities at low costs and have some unique properties
suitable for developing green building materials. In this study a blend of wool and coir were used to enhance
properties and performance of gypsum ceiling tiles. Composites were manufactured by using 30% fiber and 70%
gypsum and varying the proportion of wool and coir between 25–75%. The reinforcing fibers were combined
with gypsum using water and no other chemical or additives are necessary, making the production of tiles simple
and environmentally friendly. Fiber reinforced gypsum showed higher strength (up to 90% higher) and modulus
(up to 7%) and also better resistance to moisture. Wool fibers provided substantially higher moisture resistance
while coir provided better strength. A blend of the two fibers provided a flame resistance rating of V1 compared
to V0 for pure gypsum. Reinforcing gypsum with coir and wool would not only improve thermal and acoustic
properties but will also help to reduce cost and make a major portion of the gypsum ceiling tiles biodegradable
and thereby decrease environmental burden and helps towards promoting green building initiatives.

1. Introduction als and petroleum based products [2,3]. The construction industry is
also responsible for about 21% of global energy consumption [4].
Concerns on greenhouse gas emissions and related environmental Hence, considerable efforts are being made to develop sustainable and
changes are felt across the globe. Efforts to reduce greenhouse gases green materials for building and construction. For instance, green
(GHGs) and global warming have been promoted through the clean de- building technologies (GBTs), are being aggressively pursued across the
velopment mechanism (CDM) adopted during the Kyoto protocol agree- globe. It has been suggested that increased awareness on cost and envi-
ments [1]. Construction and building industries have a major contribu- ronmental benefits of GBTs, stringent government regulations, and
tion towards increasingGHGs from the sourcing of materials, construc- green ratings and labeling are required to promote GBTs [5].
tion, use and disposal of the structures. Studies have shown that use of False roofings (ceiling tiles) are one of the most extensively used
biobased materials and recycling of materials can contribute towards construction materials particularly for industrial and commercial build-
reducing the GHGs and environmental foot print from the construction ings. The global ceiling tiles market is estimated to be worth about $10
and building industries [2]. For instance, the effect of building con- billion. Gypsum, mineral, wood and fiber-based ceiling tiles are mostly
struction are estimated to contribute about 6.8% of GHGs and 24% and used in the market with gypsum-based tiles having a predominant
69% at the national and local levels with major contribution from met- share. Gypsum is known for its low cost, relatively low weight, good

* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: [email protected] (N. Reddy).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jobe.2021.102433
Received 26 December 2020; Received in revised form 13 March 2021; Accepted 18 March 2021
Available online 22 March 2021
2352-7102/© 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
V. Guna et al. Journal of Building Engineering 41 (2021) 102433

thermal and heat insulation and flame resistance [6]. However, gyp- Wool fibers are relatively weak fibers and have lower durability com-
sum-based ceiling tiles are susceptible to moisture and growth of fungi pared to lignocellulosic fibers. Also, unless thoroughly cleaned and
and also have relatively low mechanical properties particularly impact processed, wool fibers have an undesirable odor that may persist in the
resistance. For instance, a case study on the effects of indoor micro products.
biota showed that fungi could considerably decrease the mechanical Coir is another major fibrous material that is derived as a byproduct
strength and cause weight loss of up to 80% depending on the prevail- and extensively used for various industrial applications. Considerably
ing environmental conditions [7]. Gypsum also poses problems when high lignin content (up to 30%) which provides enhanced durability,
disposed into the environment since it releases hydrogen sulfide into high elongation and low cost make coir a preferred fiber, particularly
landfills and is considered a contaminant when recycling construction for non-apparel uses. Several reports suggest that coir can be employed
and building wastes [8,9]. To overcome these limitations, several nat- effectively in the building and construction industries [27–29]. Addi-
ural and synthetic additives, construction and building wastes, recycled tion of coir into concrete increased post-crack resistance and strength
rubber etc have been included and modifications done to gypsum-based but made the mortar more susceptible to water. Similarly, sound ab-
ceiling tiles to improve performance properties [10–15]. sorption co-efficient for coir reinforced insulating panels was compara-
Fibrous reinforcements provide strength and stability to gypsum- ble to that of rock wool and synthetic fibers. Phenol formaldehyde-
based ceiling tiles and are hence extensively used. Both natural and syn- based partition panels reinforced with coir fibers having density be-
thetic fibers have been used as reinforcement. In a recent study, hemp tween 510 and 540 kg/m3 had thermal conductivity of 0.1036 W/mK
fibers (1 or 2%) were combined with gypsum and studied for changes in and modulus of elasticity (MOE) of 13,317 kg/cm2, making them suit-
performance properties in comparison to glass fiber reinforced gypsum able for building insulation applications [30,31]. Although coir has
boards. Adding fibers showed considerable increase in toughness and been extensively used for reinforcing polymers, mortar etc., there are
reduced brittleness. Compared to glass fibers, hemp fibers were able to very few reports on using coir to enhance the properties of gypsum.
bind better with gypsum and provided an increase of 90% in flexural Coir fibers cut into 3–12 mm length and combined with gypsum in
strength. The fibers were also able to provide enhanced protection (3–18%) along with wood particles provided enhanced modulus of rup-
against impact resistance and penetration [6,16]. In another study, sisal ture, modulus of elasticity and internal bond strength. Increase in mod-
fibers with a density of 1360 kg/m3 and in non-woven form were used ulus and strength was also obtained when gypsum was reinforced with
in multiple layers as reinforcement for gypsum to improve performance short sisal fibers depending on the ratio of the length of the fibers used.
properties. Thermal conductivity of the gypsum improved from However, it was found that reinforcement using fibers above a critical
0.75 W/m/k for pure gypsum to 0.91 for the reinforced samples [17, length was detrimental to the properties [32].
18]. Composite panels were suggested to be suitable for indoor and out- Given the unique and distinct properties of coir and wool fibers and
door applications depending on the weather conditions. In a unique ap- their availability as byproducts at low cost, the objective of this work
proach, form-stable phase change materials made using methyl stearate was to study the feasibility of using waste wool and coir fibers as rein-
and diatomite were added (40%) into gypsum and studied for changes forcement for gypsum-based ceiling tiles both as individual fibers and
in thermal behavior and mechanical properties. Compared to regular also in various blend proportions. In addition to the changes in mechan-
gypsum boards, it was estimated that adding the phase change materi- ical properties, the acoustic, thermal and flame resistance properties
als would provide an energy saving up to 16% in actual use conditions. were investigated in comparison to regular gypsum tiles that are com-
A maximum temperature reduction of 4.9 °C was possible by using the mercially available.
modified tiles [19] and it was estimated that the savings would provide
good return on investment with payback time of 1.7 years. To develop 2. Materials and methods
biobased ceiling tiles, gypsum was combined with nanocellulose and
coated with water repellant finishes to provide enhanced mold and 2.1. Materials
mild dew resistance. Thermal resistivity was higher and considerably
improved mildew and mold growth and flame resistance could be Sheep wool fibers (SWF) were obtained from local sources where
achieved by adding nanocellulose [20,21]. the wool fibers were disposed as waste after shearing of the sheep. Av-
Although gypsum-based ceiling tiles are extensively used and satisfy erage diameter and length of the wool fibers were found to be
most requirements, concerns are expressed on the source and recycla- 10.5–18.2 μm and 6–81 mm, density of fiber 1300–1320 kg/m3, mois-
bility of gypsum [22]. Gypsum is derived from non-renewable resources ture absorption 8–13%. Coir fibers (CF) were sourced from local agri-
and once disposed; it is not biodegradable. Hence, alternatives to gyp- cultural fields near our campus in Bangalore. Average diameter and
sum-based tiles that are biodegradable, low cost and meet the specifica- length of the coir fiber were found to be 0.1–0.406 mm and
tions are being developed. Towards this, agricultural residues such as 50–110 mm, density of fiber was between 1200 and 1270 kg/m3, mois-
sugarcane bagasse, rice and ground nut husks have been used as rein- ture absorption was between 7 and 10%, tensile strength ranged from
forcement with polypropylene as matrix and composites developed for 105 to 175 MPa. Sheep wool and coir fibers were washed thoroughly
interior, particularly false ceiling applications [23–25]. These compos- with warm water to remove any dirt/mud particles and later dried at
ites provide higher tensile strength, good acoustic properties and flame 105 °C for 5 h. The dried fibers were then cut to approximately 5 mm
resistance and excellent resistance to moisture. Being agricultural size by grinding in a Wiley Mill and stored for further use. Prior to
residues, the reinforcements (up to 90%) reduce the cost and also make milling, coir fibers were carded using a carding machine several times
the ceiling tiles biodegradable and environmentally friendly. to disentangle the coir fibers. To develop the composites, SWF and CF
Similar to the crop residues, low quality wool and wool waste are were used as reinforcement in their native form without any chemical
available in large quantities and are inexpensive. Wool fibers are treatment. Deionized water was used for the water absorption experi-
known for their insulation properties, high flame resistance and ability ments.
to retain warmth. Hence, waste wool was combined with polypropylene
and made into composites for building and automotive applications 2.2. Composite fabrication
[23,26]. Composites containing 90% wool had flame resistance rating
of V0 similar to commercially available gypsum tiles and thermal con- Production of sheep wool/coir fiber reinforced plasters was done by
ductivity was between 0.058 and 0.083 W/mk with high noise absorp- following the steps outlined in Fig. 1. The dry mixture was firstly ho-
tion co-efficient of 0.86. Based on these results, it is clear that wool mogenized in a Remi (RQ-121)Homogenizer to which a minimum
fibers offer better properties when used for false ceiling applications. quantity (67%) of distilled water required to achieve homogenous mix-

2
V. Guna et al. Journal of Building Engineering 41 (2021) 102433

Fig. 1. Schematic representation of the process used for fabrication of sheep wool/coir fiber reinforced gypsum composites.

ing was added and the mixture was stirred for about 30s. The stir speed Table 2
was kept constant at 1000 rpm. The homogenized mixture was casted Specifications of the Coir/Sheep Wool/Gypsum composites with varying den-
into open molds (160 × 40 × 20 mm and 200 × 200 × 20 mm) and sities.
the mixture was tapped from sides for about 30s (Figure S1). To vary Combined weight of Sample Average weight Average
the density, the thickness of the gypsum board fabricated (160 mm and reinforcement and matrix Dimension (mm of dry samples density
40 mm) was adjusted using spacers of thickness 20 mm, 10 mm or x mm x mm) (kg) (kg/m3)

5 mm. All the plasters had a setting time of about 20 min, regardless of Gypsum/Sheep Gypsum/Coir
the fibers' present. After 2 h from the setting of the plaster, the speci- Wool (w/w %) (w/w %)
mens were removed from the molds, and oven dried for 48 h at 40 °C
90/10 90/10 0.16*0.04*0.01 0.05376 840
and finally stored in a humidity chamber (Memmert, CTC 256) at 20 °C
80/20 80/20
and RH = 50%, until the time of testing. A minimum of 5 samples were 70/30 70/30
prepared for each ratio. The average density of all the ratio was calcu- 60/40 60/40
lated using the standard mass/volume method using all five samples. 100/0 100/0
The sample preparation conditions are summarized in Tables 1 and 2. Coir/Sheep Wool/Gypsum
(w/w %)
10/20/70 0.16*0.04*0.005 0.1344 420
15/15/70
Table 1 20/10/70
Sample preparation conditions of sheep wool/coir/gypsum composites. 0.16*0.04*0.01 0.5376 840
10/20/70
Sample Gypsum Water W/G Coir Wool 15/15/70
(g) (g) Ratio (g) (g) 20/10/70

10/20/70 0.16*0.04*0.02 1.5616 1220

Reference 1000 670 0.67 – –
15/15/70
Gypsum/Coir 90/10 900 603 0.67 100 –
20/10/70
80/20 800 536 0.67 200 –
70/30 700 469 0.67 300 –
60/40 600 402 0.67 400 –
Gypsum/Sheep Wool 90/10 900 603 0.67 – 100
2.3. Surface morphology
80/20 800 536 0.67 – 200
70/30 700 469 0.67 – 300 A Hitachi SU3500model Scanning Electron Microscope (SEM) was
60/40 600 402 0.67 – 400 used to study the morphology of the samples, the interfacial bonding
Coir/Sheep 10/20/70 700 469 0.67 100 200 and the fracture surface of the composites. As our sample is non-
Wool/Gypsum
conductive we have sputter coated with gold for 30 s, using an ion sput-
15/15/70 700 469 0.67 150 150
20/10/70 700 469 0.67 200 100 ter-coater. SEM images were captured in different magnifications in SE
10/20/70 700 469 0.67 100 200 mode at a voltage 10 kV.
15/15/70 700 469 0.67 150 150
20/10/70 700 469 0.67 200 100
10/20/70 700 469 0.67 100 200
15/15/70 700 469 0.67 150 150
20/10/70 700 469 0.67 200 100

3
V. Guna et al. Journal of Building Engineering 41 (2021) 102433

2.4. Flexural strength

Three point bending test was carried out in order to estimate the
ability of the reinforcement to improve ultimate strength and tough-
ness. A Universal Testing Machine (mecmesin 10-i, United Kingdom)
with a 500 N load cell was used to carry out the flexural test of the sam-
ples measuring 160 × 40 × 20 mm, according to the Standard UNI EN
1015-11. The crosshead speed was set at 5 mm/min. At least 15 sam-
ples were tested for each condition and the average values along with
± one standard deviation were reported.

2.5. Thermal conductivity

Thermal conductivity was measured using the JIS 1412-2 standard

in an EKO Thermal Conductometer. A minimum of 3 samples of
200 mm × 200 mm x 10 mm each were tested in every ratio for the
thermal conductivity. Briefly, the test sample is stacked in between a
heating plate and cooling plate (illustrated in Fig. 2) that maintains a
steady temperature difference allowing heat to flow across the sample
at a constant rate. Thermal conductivity was calculated based on the re-
sistivity to the heat flow.

2.6. Flammability

The flammability of the pure and blended gypsum boards was deter-
mined according to UL-94 standards by the vertical test method (Fig.
3). The samples were 125 mm in length 13 mm in width and 10 mm
thick. Briefly, the samples were ignited by a flame for 10s and there-
after let to burn on its own. Surgical cotton was placed below the sam-
ple to check for any dripping. Based on the time to extinguish and drip-
ping, the flammability rating was determined. The consistency of the
ratings allotted was confirmed by testing the flammability on five sam- Fig. 3. Digital image of flammability test (a) Composite sample (b) Composite
ples for each ratio/condition. sample ignited using a burner (c) Composite sample under ignition (d) Compos-
ite sample after the flames have self-extinguished.
2.7. Water absorption test
sample. The average of at least 3 trials were reported for each ratio in
Moisture resistance is one of the prime drawbacks in gypsum-based the above test.
ceiling tiles. In this study, the percentage of water absorbed by the sam-
ples over a period of 24 h were measured (Figure S2) using ASTM 2.8. Sound absorption
D570-98 standards. Briefly, samples measuring 40 × 40 × 10 mm
were cut, dried in a hot air oven at 105 °C until constant weight (w1) The sound absorption coefficient of all the gypsum/coir/wool sam-
was attained. The sample was then placed in a beaker containing dis- ples were tested according to the ISO 10534-2:1998 standards. About 5
tilled water. The sample was taken out every 2 h. Once taken out of wa- specimens of 30 mm diameter were cut from different batches and
ter, the samples were carefully dried using a soft tissue and then tested for noise absorption in an impedance tube (SW 477, BSWA Tech-
weighed again (w2). The difference in weight of the samples was ex- nology Co. Ltd, Beijing, China). The absorption was tested in the range
pressed as the percentage ((w2-w1/w1) x 100%) water absorbed by the of 0–6500 Hz. The average absorption coefficient was reported (see Fig.
9).

3. Results and discussion

3.1. Mechanical properties

3.1.1. Flexural properties

Addition of fibers substantially increases both the strength and mod-
ulus of gypsum. The extent of increase in strength is directly related to
the amount of reinforcing fibers. Tensile properties improved when the
proportion of fibers was increased from 10 to 30% for both coir and
sheep wool with higher increase in modulus of the composites than
strength (Fig. 4). Substantial decrease (72% for coir and 60% for sheep
wool) are observed when the fiber content is increased to 40% from
30%. Interestingly, the strength of the fiber reinforced gypsum is higher
by about 89% but modulus similar to the pure gypsum boards when the
optimum fiber ratio of 30% was used. Increasing fiber content leads to
reinforcement of gypsum and hence increases the strength and elonga-
tion which has been observed in previous studies also. Based on these
Fig. 2. Illustration of the setup used for the thermal conductivity test.

4
V. Guna et al. Journal of Building Engineering 41 (2021) 102433

Fig. 4. Influence of fiber content on the flexural strength and modulus of gypsum ceiling tiles made by blending different ratios of either gypsum and coir or gypsum
and sheep wool.

results, it is apparent that 30% fiber provide the optimum flexural prop- wool and coir proportions were varied at a density of840 kg/m3. At the
erties. When the concentration of the fibers is 10%, coir fibers provide highest density of 1220 kg/m3, the change in strength is 19% and mod-
substantially higher strength but similar modulus compared to wool ulus is 71% with the trend of higher wool content providing better mod-
fibers. Although coir fibers typically provide increasing strength to the ulus and higher coir content providing better strength being true.
composites with increase in proportion of fibers, the magnitude of dif- The changes in the flexural properties of the ceiling tiles with chang-
ference between coir and wool fibers reduces. The extent of improve- ing density and fiber content should be due to inherent properties of the
ment in properties should be based on the changes in the interaction be- fibers and extent of interaction of the fibers with gypsum. Wool and coir
tween the fibers and gypsum. Since gypsum and the fibers are hy- have considerably distinct characteristics including fineness and com-
drophilic, good interaction can be expected. At higher concentrations positions. Coir fibers are coarse whereas wool fibers are considerably
(above 30%) there would be insufficient gypsum to bind the fibers and finer. In terms of composition, wool is made up to proteins compared to
hence the properties decrease. A fiber reinforcement of 30% was con- the lignocellulosic coir which has up to 30% lignin and about 30–35%
sidered optimum and used to study the effect of increasing density of cellulose. Hence, the properties and performance of the fibers in the
the ceiling tiles on flexural strength and modulus (see Fig. 5). gypsum boards varies. Another major factor contributing to the differ-
Increasing the density of the ceiling tiles from 420 to 1220 kg/m3 ences in properties between fibers is their density. Wool fibers have
did not show major changes in the strength of the samples. However, density of 900 kg/m3 and the density of the coir fibers is 1500 kg/m3.
modulus increased by about 77% when 20% coir and 10% sheep wool Hence, even if the same weight of the fibers are used, there will be con-
was used. At a particular density (for example at 420 kg/m3), varying siderably higher mass of wool fibers which makes the gypsum compact
the proportion of coir and wool improved the strength by 72% com- and have better properties. However, as the density of the ceiling tiles
pared to 56% change in modulus. However, strength and modulus increases (mass per unit area also increases), the differences in the con-
showed opposite trends with change in wool and coir ratios. Higher tribution by the fibers reduces.
proportion of coir provides better strength whereas higher wool pro- Previous studies have also shown that the properties of the ceiling
vides better modulus. A maximum difference of 38% is observed in tiles can be controlled based on the amount and type of fibers and the
strength whereas only about 11% variation is seen in modulus when specifications desired for the end-use [32]. However, substantial de-

Fig. 5. Changes in the flexural strength of the gypsum ceiling tiles made using 70% gypsum and blends of coir and wool in different proportions and at three different
densities of the ceiling tiles.

5
V. Guna et al. Journal of Building Engineering 41 (2021) 102433

crease in flexural and tensile strength up to 78% was observed when the ceiling tiles with varying ratios of the two fibers shown in Table 3.
saw dust and wood shavings were combined with gypsum [33]. Studies Composites containing 30% coir had the lowest flame resistance and
have shown that reinforcing gypsum with elastomeric materials such as were categorized as V2 among the samples tested. The gypsum contain-
waste rubber in discarded tires can lead to increase in extensibility and ing 30% wool and a blend of the two fibers all had V1 ratings. Although
strength [34]. Using biobased materials not only reduces the amount of the ratings are the same, the actual time recorded before dripping was
gypsum used and increases biodegradability but also helps to consume longer when wool fibers were more than coir fibers. Using wool rich
the biomass and add value. Such efforts, particularly when using agri- gypsum tiles may be required to meet fire specifications for commercial
cultural residues, will also contribute to enhancing the profits from use.
agriculture and benefits farmers. The process of developing the ceiling
tiles is relatively simple and hence new processing facilities can be set- 3.2.3. Changes in morphology
up in areas where the wool, coir and other residues are available in Both coir and wool fibers showed good interaction with gypsum. No
large quantities. fiber pull-outs were observed indicating compatibility. Relatively fewer
fibers (a-c) can be observed in the coir rich gypsum compared to wool
3.2. Physical properties containing gypsum tiles Fig. 7(d–f) since the density of wool fibers is
lower and the mass of fibers will be higher. Also, wool fibers are consid-
3.2.1. Water sorption erably finer than coir fibers and can probably blend better with gyp-
Ability to sorb high amounts of water/moisture is one of the major sum. Extensive distribution of fibers is evident in the blend containing
disadvantages of gypsum boards. As seen from Fig. 6, the water sorp- 50% wool and 50% coir fibers (g-i). Although the morphology of the
tion is highest for the pure gypsum boards and reaches up to 27% tiles changes with fiber type and content, their influence on morphol-
within 12 min of immersion. Considerable reduction is sorption occurs ogy or performance properties is not directly evident. Having higher
due to the addition of the fibers. Including 30% coir increased the water amount of wool fibers towards the surface of the composites may pro-
sorption by about 10% whereas panels containing 30% wool had sorp- vide better moisture resistance. Blending of coir fibers into the gypsum
tion between the pure gypsum and gypsum-30% coir panels. Interest- and achieving uniform distribution during preparation of the ceiling
ingly, using a blend of wool and coir provided the least water sorption. tiles was also difficult compared to wool fibers.
The sample containing 10% coir, 20% sheep wool and 70% gypsum had
the lowest sorption of 12%. Although both wool and coir are considered 3.2.4. Thermal conductivity
hydrophilic, raw wool contains grease and other hydrophobic sub- Fig. 8 provides a comparison of the thermal conductivity of unrein-
stances which protects the wool from degradation when exposed to forced gypsum and that reinforced with sheep wool or coir fibers. The
moisture and environmental conditions. Since we have used raw and thermal conductivity of the hybrid composites was found to vary de-
unprocessed wool, it is expected that the panels containing higher wool pending on the amount and type of fibers used. The lowest thermal
content should have lower water sorption. Behavior of the panels con- conductivity (0.170 W/mK) was observed in control sample (100%
taining blend fibers should depend on the distribution of the fibers. gypsum) suggesting that gypsum was able to provide good heat insula-
Having wool on the surface and coir in the inner layers may provide tion. The coir reinforced samples had the highest conductivity
better resistance to water. Previous studies have also shown reduction (0.305 W/mK). SWF reinforced gypsum had comparatively lower ther-
in sorption of water by gypsum after addition of natural fibers [24]. mal conductivity than coir reinforced gypsum composites since wool
has better insulation properties than lignocellulosic fibers such as coir.
3.2.2. Resistance to flammability This effect is due to the trapped air in the air pockets formed by ker-
Providing protection against flames is one of the inherent and pri- atin protein molecules. Hence, increasing the SWF concentration de-
mary requirements for ceiling tiles. Commercially available gypsum creased the thermal conductivity of the samples. Although hybrid
boards have excellent flame resistance and a highest flame resistance composites developed did not show much difference in values (ranges
rating of V-0. (UL-94 standard) Coir is a lignocellulosic fiber and inher- from 0.250 to 0.276 W/mK) with variation in fiber content, the ther-
ently flammable whereas wool being a protein fiber has good resistance mal insulation was not affected by the fiber content to a major extent.
to flammability. These differences are evident in the rating obtained for Also, additives to improve the insulation can be used depending on the
specific application. Decrease in thermal conductivity of gypsum
boards reinforced with saw dust and wood shavings has been reported
earlier [33]. In another study, it has been reported that addition of
20% wood shavings could improve the thermal resistance with trans-
mittance values decreasing to 0.620 W/mK, compared to 0.636 W/mK
[35]. Providing appropriate thermal comfort indoors in office and
other working environments requires large amounts of energy. Ceiling
tiles can assist in regulating room temperatures and reducing noise. In-
corporating biobased content into ceiling tiles will not only increase

Table 3
Flammability ratings of the hybrid and non-hybrid composites compared with
gypsum board.
Coir/Sheep Time to Self-Extinguish After Observed UL-94
wool/Gypsum w/w/% Ignition (s) Dripping Rating

30/00/70 <30 Yes V2

00/20/70 <30 No V1
10/20/70 <30 No V1
15/15/70 <30 No V1
Fig. 6. Percentage water absorption of the 840 kg/m3 hybrid and non-hybrid 20/10/70 <30 No V1
gypsum based composites compared with unreinforced gypsum board. 00/00/100 <30 No V0

6
V. Guna et al. Journal of Building Engineering 41 (2021) 102433

Fig. 7. SEM images of (a–c) Cross sectional view of coir and gypsum surface (d–f) at three different magnifications. Cross sectional view of sheep wool and gypsum
surface (g–i) at ×500 and ×200 μm, respectively. Cross sectional view showing the matrix and reinforcement bonding in 15/15/70 coir/sheep wool/gypsum hy-
brid composite at ×50, ×100 and ×250, respectively.

Fig. 8. Changes in the thermal conductivity of the gypsum composites contain- Fig. 9. Sound absorption coefficient of gypsum composites different proportion
ing different proportions of coir and sheep wool or both. of coir/sheep wool.

biodegradability of the tiles but also provide desired performance absorption is very minimal (up to 0.25). However, in the 1500–3000 Hz
properties [36]. range, a broad peak is observed in 10/20/70 and 15/15/70 coir/sheep
wool/gypsum composite (max absorption coefficient of 0.25 and 0.32
3.2.5. Sound absorption respectively). Typically, biomass has been reported to have lower ab-
Sound absorption characteristics of coir/sheep wool/gypsum com- sorption in the low frequency range [25]. This could be improved by al-
posite is given in Fig. 9. In the lower frequency range (0–1500 Hz) the tering the bulk properties of the reinforcements. At higher range, two

7
V. Guna et al. Journal of Building Engineering 41 (2021) 102433

Table 4
Comparison of properties of coil/wool/gypsum composites developed in this study with prior studies done using different biobased reinforcement for gypsum.
Composite Sample Density Flexural Strength Flexural Modulus Thermal Conductivity Sound Absorption Water Absorption Reference
(kg/m3) (MPa) (MPa) (W/mK) Coefficient (α) (%)

Glass – 2.2–4 300–550 – – – [6]

Fiber/Hemp/Gypsum
Expanded 460–980 1.09–3.1 – 0.078–0.129 – – [10]
polystyrene/Gypsum
Gypsum/Sisal FIber 1020–1200 – – 0.75–0.91 – – [17]
Wood Waste/Gypsum 702–1307 1.23–4.1 – 0.2–0.5 0.1–0.65 – [35]
Coir/Wool/Gypsuma 420–1200 1.25–3.78 (4–7%) 4.99–6.88 (4–7%) 0.17–0.305 (2–5%) 0.15–0.35 (2–6%) 14.56–27.25 (2– This
5%) Study
a CoV (%) values in parenthesis

sharp peaks can be seen in the 15/15/70 coir/sheep wool/gypsum com- plications have to be evaluated. In addition, the resistance of the fiber
posite (3500–5000 Hz range). A major peak at 5500 Hz with the high- reinforced with gypsum towards microorganisms and its benefits in im-
est absorption coefficient (0.35) is found in the 30/00/70 coir/sheep proving the biodegradation of the gypsum based tiles should also be in-
wool/gypsum composite. Throughout the study, samples with higher vestigated. Wool, coir and other fibers generated as residues can be uti-
coir content are seen to have better acoustic performance than wool lized for the production of green and sustainable buildings and reduce
fibers. This could be due to the rough surface morphology of coir fibers GHGs.
compared to the finer surface of wool fibers. As the surface gets
rougher, the interaction of sound waves is increased leading to better Declaration of competing interest
absorption [25]. Overall, the sound absorption performance is moder-
ate in the coir/wool/gypsum composites. The authors declare that they have no known competing interests or
personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work
3.3. Comparison with other studies reported in this paper.

Table 4 shows a comparison of the properties of composites devel- Acknowledgements

oped in this study with those reported earlier. Since the fabrication
techniques, characterization parameters and standards followed are Authors thank CEFIPRA for their financial assistance to complete
different, the comparison is only an indication of the range of proper- this work through project number 7134. NR and VK also thank the Cen-
ties and should be taken with caution. However, overall, the proper- ter for Incubation, Innovation, Research and Consultancy for their help
ties of the composites developed in this study can be compared to to complete this work.
those developed using different biobased materials. The glass fiber-
hemp reinforced gypsum composites have flexural modulus many Appendix A. Supplementary data
magnitudes higher than the coir-wool fiber reinforced gypsum be-
cause of the modulus of glass fibers (70–80 GPa) compared to Supplementary data to this article can be found online at https://
2–8 GPa for coir and 2–3 GPa for wool fibers. Density of wool fibers doi.org/10.1016/j.jobe.2021.102433.
(0.9 g/cm3) is lower than the density of most cellulosic fibers
(1.5 g/cm3). References

[1] K.L. Mok, S.H. Han, S. Choi, The implementation of clean development mechanism
4. Conclusions
(CDM) in the construction and built environment industry, Energy Pol. 65 (2014)
512–523, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2013.10.039.
Substituting gypsum with natural, biodegradable and economical [2] Y.L. Li, M.Y. Han, S.Y. Liu, G.Q. Chen, Energy consumption and greenhouse gas
fibers such as wool and coir will lead to reduction in GHGs and promote emissions by buildings: a multi-scale perspective, Build. Environ. 151 (2019)
240–250, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2018.11.003.
green building initiatives. Previous studies have used various biomass [3] M. Yu, M. Robati, P. Oldfield, T. Wiedmann, R. Crawford, A.A. Nezhad, D.
based materials as reinforcement for gypsum but the distinct properties Carmichael, The impact of value engineering on embodied greenhouse gas
of wool and coir which make them ideal for building and construction emissions in the built environment: a hybrid life cycle assessment, Build. Environ.
168 (2020) 106452, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2019.106452.
applications have not been combined and used to develop ceiling tiles. [4] S. Janjua, P. Sarker, W. Biswas, Sustainability assessment of a residential building
Wool and coir provide gypsum the necessary increase in strength, sta- using a life cycle assessment approach, Chem. Eng. Trans. 72 (2019) 19–24, https://
bility and resistance to moisture that will increase the durability and doi.org/10.3303/CET1972004.
[5] A.P.C. Chan, A. Darko, E.E. Ameyaw, Strategies for promoting green building
functionality of false ceilings. Wool that is currently disposed as waste technologies adoption in the construction industry—an international study,
and causes pollution can be effectively used. With only 30% fibers, the Sustainability 7 (6) (2017) 969, https://doi.org/10.3390/su9060969.
strength of the gypsum tiles could be increased by 125% and modulus [6] F. Iucolano, L. Boccarusso, A. Langella, Hemp as eco-friendly substitute of glass
fibres for gypsum reinforcement: impact and flexural behaviour, Compos. B Eng.
by 8% compared to pure gypsum. Thermal conductivity showed mar-
175 (2019) 107073, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compositesb.2019.107073.
ginal increase making the blend composites less prone to thermal insu- [7] N. Kazemian, S. Pakpour, A.S. Milani, J. Klironomos, Environmental factors
lation particularly when higher amounts of coir fibers were present. influencing fungal growth on gypsum boards and their structural biodeterioration: a
However, flame resistance of the composites was lower (V1) compared university campus case study, PloS One 14 (8) (2019) e0220556, https://doi.org/
10.1371/journal.pone.0220556.
to the pure gypsum with a rating of V0. Adding both wool and coir seem [8] A. Jiménez-Rivero, J. García-Navarro, Management of end-of-life gypsum in a
to be necessary to meet the desired specifications. Wool and coir are circular economy, Advances in Construction and Demolition Waste Recycling, vols.
readily available and since the process of adding the fibers is simple, the 69–79, Woodhead Publishing, 2020, https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-819055-
5.00005-X.
process can be adopted on a larger scale and hence commercial poten- [9] M. del Río Merino, M. Sorrentino, C.M. Torre, P. Villoria-Sáez, Performance
tial of fiber reinforced gypsum is high. Easy recovery of gypsum and evaluation of waste materials in construction for sustainability, International
reuse of the fibers would also be possible when the ceiling tiles need to Conference on Computational Science and its Applications, Springer, Cham, 2018,
pp. 69–83, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-95168-3_5.
be disposed. However, further trials on performance of the fiber rein- [10] A. San-Antonio-González, M.D.R. Merino, C.V. Arrebola, P. Villoria-Sáez,
forced gypsum under practical use conditions and during long-term ap- Lightweight material made with gypsum and EPS waste with enhanced mechanical

8
V. Guna et al. Journal of Building Engineering 41 (2021) 102433

strength, J. Mater. Civ. Eng. 28 (2) (2016) 04015101, https://doi.org/10.1061/ [24] V. Guna, M. Ilangovan, H.R. Vighnesh, B.R. Sreehari, S. Abhijith, H.E. Sachin, C.B.
(ASCE)MT.1943-5533.0001382. Mohan, N. Reddy, Engineering sustainable waste wool biocomposites with high
[11] Y.G. Xi, T.J. Peng, H.F. Liu, J.M. Chen, Preparation and properties of expanded flame resistance and noise insulation for green building and automotive
vermiculite/gypsum thermal insulation boards, Advanced Materials Research, vol. applications, J. Nat. Fibers (2019) 1–11, https://doi.org/10.1080/15440478.2019.
178, Trans Tech Publications Ltd, 2011, pp. 220–225 https://doi.org/10.4028/ 1701610.
www.scientific.net/AMR.178.220. [25] V. Guna, M. Ilangovan, M.H. Rather, B.V. Giridharan, B. Prajwal, K.V. Krishna, K.
[12] S. RomaniegaPiñeiro, M. del Río Merino, C. Pérez García, New plaster composite Venkatesh, N. Reddy, Groundnut shell/rice husk agro-waste reinforced
with mineral wool fibres from CDW recycling, Adv. Mater. Sci. Eng. (2015), https:// polypropylene hybrid biocomposites, J. Build. Eng. 27 (2020) 100991, https://doi.
doi.org/10.1155/2015/854192. org/10.1016/j.jobe.2019.100991.
[13] O. Gencel, J.J. del Coz Diaz, M. Sutcu, F. Koksal, F. Pedro Álvarez Rabanal, G. [26] M. Parlato, S. Porto, Organized framework of main possible applications of sheep
Martínez-Barrera, A novel lightweight gypsum composite with diatomite and wool fibers in building components, Sustainability 12 (2020) 761, https://doi.org/
polypropylene fibers, Construct. Build. Mater. 113 (2016) 732–740, https://doi. 10.3390/su12030761.
org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2016.03.125. [27] P. Lertwattanaruk, A. Suntijitto, Properties of natural fiber cement materials
[14] Á. Serna, M. del Río, J.G. Palomo, M. González, Improvement of gypsum plaster containing coconut coir and oil palm fibers for residential building applications,
strain capacity by the addition of rubber particles from recycled tyres, Construct. Construct. Build. Mater. 94 (2015) 664–669, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
Build. Mater. 35 (2012) 633–641, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2012.04. conbuildmat.2015.07.154.
093. [28] N. Sathiparan, M.N. Rupasinghe, B.H.M. Pavithra, Performance of coconut coir
[15] A.B. Cherki, B. Remy, A. Khabbazi, Y. Jannot, D. Baillis, Experimental thermal reinforced hydraulic cement mortar for surface plastering application, Construct.
properties characterization of insulating cork–gypsum composite, Construct. Build. Build. Mater. 142 (2017) 23–30, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2017.03.
Mater. 54 (2014) 202–209, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2013.12.076. 058.
[16] S.M. Elgizawy, S.M. El-Haggar, K. Nassar, Approaching sustainability of [29] N. Reddy, Applications of coir fibers in construction, Sustainable Applications of
construction and demolition waste using zero waste concept, Low Carbon Econ. 7 Coir and Other Coconut By-Products, Springer, Cham, 2019, pp. 75–93, https://doi.
(2016) 1–11, https://doi.org/10.4236/lce.2016.71001. org/10.1007/978-3-030-21055-7_4.
[17] C.C. Pinto, R.F. Carvalho, Thermal performance evaluation of a low-cost housing [30] J. Khedari, N. Nankongnab, J. Hirunlabh, S. Teekasap, New low-cost insulation
ceiling prototype made with gypsum and sisal fibre panels, IOP Conference Series: particleboards from mixture of durian peel and coconut coir, Build. Environ. 39
Earth and Environmental Science, vol. 296, IOP Publishing, 2019 012015, https:// (2004) 59–65, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2003.08.001.
doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/296/1/012015. [31] J. Khedari, S. Charoenvai, J. Hirunlabh, New insulating particleboards from durian
[18] R.H. Geraldo, J.D. Souza, S.C. Campos, L.F.R. Fernandes, G. Camarini, Pressured peel and coconut coir, Build. Environ. 38 (2003) 435–441, https://doi.org/10.
recycled gypsum plaster and wastes: characteristics of eco-friendly building 1016/S0360-1323(02)00030-6.
components, Construct. Build. Mater. 191 (2018) 136–144, https://doi.org/10. [32] F. Hernández-Olivares, I. Oteiza, L. de Villanueva, Experimental analysis of
1016/j.conbuildmat.2018.09.193. toughness and modulus of rupture increase of sisal short fiber reinforced
[19] M.J. Abden, Z. Tao, Z. Pan, L. George, R. Wuhrer, Inclusion of methyl stearate/ hemihydrated gypsum, Compos. Struct. 22 (1992) 123–137, https://doi.org/10.
diatomite composite in gypsum board ceiling for building energy conservation, 1016/0263-8223(92)90001-S.
Appl. Energy 259 (2020) 114113, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2019. [33] M.J. Morales-Conde, C. Rodríguez-Liñán, M.A. Pedreño-Rojas, Physical and
114113. mechanical properties of wood-gypsum composites from demolition material in
[20] N. Yildirim, Design of adhesive-free bio-based suspended ceiling tiles using rehabilitation works, Construct. Build. Mater. 114 (2016) 6–14, https://doi.org/10.
nanocellulose, BioResources 13 (2018) 7360–7370. 1016/j.conbuildmat.2016.03.137.
[21] F. Vavili, A. Kyrkou, Sustainability and energy efficiency design in hospital [34] F. Parres, J.E. Crespo-Amorós, A. Nadal-Gisbert, Mechanical properties analysis of
buildings, Energy Efficient Building Design, vols. 157–169, Springer, Cham, 2020, plaster reinforced with fiber and microfiber obtained from shredded tires,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-40671-4_10. Construct. Build. Mater. 23 (10) (2009) 3182–3188, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
[22] N. Lushnikova, L. Dvorkin, Sustainability of gypsum products as a construction conbuildmat.2009.06.040.
material, Sustainability of Construction Materials, Woodhead Publishing, 2016, pp. [35] M.A. Pedreño-Rojas, M.J. Morales-Conde, F. Pérez-Gálvez, C. Rodríguez-Liñán, Eco-
643–681, https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-08-100370-1.00025-1. efficient acoustic and thermal conditioning using false ceiling plates made from
[23] V. Guna, M. Ilangovan, C. Hu, K. Venkatesh, N. Reddy, Valorization of sugarcane plaster and wood waste, J. Clean. Prod. 166 (2017) 690–705, https://doi.org/10.
bagasse by developing completely biodegradable composites for industrial 1016/j.jclepro.2017.08.077.
applications, Ind. Crop. Prod. 131 (2019) 25–31, https://doi.org/10.1016/j. [36] A.H.A. Thanim, M.H. Abdul Samad, A review on sustainable design and indoor
indcrop.2019.01.011. thermal comfort of a green building, ARPN J. Eng. Appl. Sci. 1 (2016) 3712–3717.